Fixing the way the B1G chooses a champion

A B1G Problem:

The Big Ten has a problem this season. Nobody thinks that the winner of the B1G championship game is the best team in the league. Part of this is because the divisions are unbalanced (which will happen because things change). Another part of this is because there are only 9 games for each team in a 14-team conference. Lastly, non-conference games don’t matter. I know College football is not the NFL, but the NFL uses overall record to determine division champs, and division record as a tie-breaker. Penn State lost to Pitt. 8-4 Pitt. That should matter. Instead, the B1G is all, “Why does it even matter that Penn State is lost in a hole?”

The task of determining the “conference champion” must align with determining the “best team in the conference”. This is especially important in a limited-access playoff. The only reason that people are even giving a second B1G team to get in is because none of the other leagues have two clear top tier teams. The goal of every conference should be to have their conference championship game be a de-facto play-in game for the conference championship. The eye test here says that OSU and Michigan are the best teams in the league. Can we construct a system that generates that result?

A possible solution:

Many of these things can be solved by changing how we determine the conference champion, and re-structuring some things a bit.

Play 10 conference games. Five at home, five on the road. No more uneven home/road splits.

Structure non-conference play. You must play one team from a P5 conference, and one team from a G5 conference. Practically speaking, this means that each team will have 6 or 7 home games in a season (because P5 teams will want a home-and-home). Notre Dame should be considered as a P5 team since they are ACC adjacent. And it isn’t like you can tell me that they are worse than the dregs of the P5, even when they go through down stretches. Still, to hell with Notre Dame .

Use overall record as baseline comparison. All 2-way ties are broken with the head to head result. Three (or more) way ties are broken according to the typical B1G tiebreaking procedure. (1. Record against each other. 2. Record within the Conference. 3. Record within the division. 4. Higher CFP ranking.)

Play division games first, then re-align divisions into a top division (Top 4 teams from East and West) and a bottom division (Bottom 3 teams from East and West). Have teams in the Top Division play all of the other teams in the Top Division that they haven’t played yet.

Conference championship games is a rematch between the #1 and #2 teams in the top division (at a neutral site).

So a season would look like this:

Week 1: P5/G5 opponent

Week 2: G5/P5 opponent

Week 3: East/West division game 1

Week 4: East/West division game 2

Week 5: East/West division game 3

Week 6: East/West division game 4

Week 7: East/West division game 5

Week 8: East/West division game 6

Week 9: Bye week. Realign divisions

Week 10: Top/Bottom division game 1 - Played at West Home field

Week 11: Top/Bottom division game 2 - Played at East Home field

Week 12: Top/Bottom division game 3 - Played at West Home field

Week 13: Top/Bottom division game 4 - Played at East Home field (Bottom division repeats week 10 opponent at other team’s field)

Week 3-8 games are set so that home/away is balanced. Week 10-13 games are set so that home/away is balanced AND teams still know when home/away games are happening (they just don’t know the opponent). Week 9 bye is set so that people can make travel plans for the final 4 weeks. The importance of realignment is that the top teams all skip the dregs of the other division, and still all play each other.

Top Division finale:

At this point, I no longer care about the bottom division. Someone out of the bunch will get bowl elgible. Michigan State could run the table against Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, and Purdue and get to bowl elgibility too. In any case, by playing the bottom teams in the opposite division, teams that start slow have a shot at getting to a bowl game. On to the top division. Actual games that were played will only show a score. Games not played will be predicted using S&P+

Week 9 (at West)

OSU @ Wisconsin (OSU 30-23 OT)

Michigan @ Iowa (Iowa 14-13)

PSU @ Nebraska (DNP) PSU is 12th, Nebraska is 34th.

Indiana @ Minnesota (DNP) Indiana is 48th, Minnesota is 37th.

Week 10 (at East)

Wisconsin @ Michigan (Michigan 14-7)

Iowa @ PSU (PSU 41-14)

Nebraska @ Indiana (Nebraska 27-22)

Minnesota @ OSU (DNP) Minnesota is 37th, OSU is 3rd.

Week 11 (at West)

OSU @ Nebraska (62-3, Actual game in C-bus)

Michigan @ Minnesota (DNP) Michigan is 2nd, Minnesota is 37th.

PSU @ Wisconsin (PSU 38-31, Actual game in Indianapolis)

Indiana @ Iowa (DNP) Indiana is 48th, Iowa is 20th.

Week 12 (at East)

Wisconsin @ Indiana (DNP) Wisconsin is 16th, Indiana is 48th.

Iowa @ OSU (DNP) Iowa is 20th, OSU is 3rd.

Nebraska @ Michigan (DNP) Nebraska is 34th, Michigan is 2nd.

Minnesota @ PSU (PSU 29-26)

Final Standings

Team

Record

Ohio St.

11-1

Michigan

10-2

Penn St.

10-2

Wisconsin

9-3

Nebraska

9-3

Iowa

8-4

Minnesota

8-4

Indiana

4-8

Michigan wins the tie-breaker based on the head to head result (according to the 2-way tie-breaker procedure the B1G uses). Michigan plays OSU in the B1G championship game. Predict that game at your peril.

Maryland did not play a P5 team. Given their current level, it is safe to assume that they’d be calling the bottom tier of the SEC/ACC to find a “sure” win. ↩

Comment viewing options

I don't think it's a big problem that the best team didn't win the conference. The best team does not always win in sports, that's not unusual.

Your division realignment mid-season thing is intriguing, but I don't think it's practical. First, you intentionally ignored that the lower division would have to have a rematch against a bad team. That's not good. Second, not knowing your opponents ahead of time makes for some weird ticket purchses. And imagine a home B1G slate ending up as Minnesota, Purdue, Illinois, Rutgers, and Purdue again!

Ensuring that the B1G championship game is always a rematch is also not super pleasing.

The home slate would never be what you suggested. You still get 3 games against East teams (MSU, OSU, and Rutgers in even years, PSU, IU, and Maryland in odd years).

The other home games would be good if the team was good, and not so good if the team was bad.

I didn't write it down, but you just force the rematch against the other lower division team to be at the other team's site. For example, Michigan State might play @ Northwestern, vs. Illinois, @ Purdue, vs. Northwestern.

Logistical problems could be solved. That is part of the reason to make the bye week during week 9. Where there is a will, there is a way...

As far as rematch concerns go...at least a rematch is better than the #3 vs #4 teams in the B1G.

While this is intriguing, its really not practical. It essentially cuts conference play in half and creates 2 conference tourneys based on where a team is at mid season. There'd also be a new incentive for teams to schedule bad teams for the non-conference portion of the schedule since it helps them win the conference, which would presumably put them into the national tourney. Love the creativity, but just doesn't seem practical.

Ignoring the logistical (fans buying tickets, travelling to games) and practical (revenue) concerns that this plan raises, there is one major pitfall to this plan.* Such a realignment could make it more difficult to get a team in to the playoff. Sure, we think that they'd always choose the Big Ten champion, but what if every team in the Big Ten had at least two losses due to the difficulty of the schedule? If every other P5 Conference Champ had 0 or 1 loss, I could see the Big Ten getting left out. This structure would be perfect for determining the Big Ten champion, but harmful to national title hopes.

*I am ignoring those concerns, because they appear to be outside the scope of this diary, which is only concerned with on-field results.

I was expecting a bunch of those, too.
However, if you schedule it on week 8, there would be great excitement anyway.

It certainly would generate a ton of conversation during the bye week.

Old guys will hate this; too many unknowns for planning their game attendance

AD's will hate this because of last minute away game travel arrangements - especially those traveling on week 11.

In this form, you could make a case for the CCG being unnecessary.

Personally, I'm OK with on-the-field results being used. OSU shouldn't have made the CFP because the CCG must be a defacto play-in game. The old adage is; if you're the best, you win. Everything else is just feel good talk. Personally, I feel Michigan is a better team than OSU. But, you know, field results.

Would not be good for ticket sales... I'm not buying tickets for a game not knowing who's the opponent, and by the time we knew, it would probably be too late for me to actually plan that trip. No Bueno

Maybe the season ticket market would go down (though, I'd be skeptical of that), but the secondary market would blow up against top division teams. Any time you can switch out Purdue and Illinois for Wisconsin and Nebraska is a good thing.

Also, we do have some idea how the team will do. Season ticket sales might go up during a season like this one because We are swapping Illinois for Nebraska (and vs. Hawaii for @ Minnesota). In the end, I see it as trading up.

For me, going to a game involves a 6 hour drive or a more expensive flight AND having to take a day off on Friday to have time to get to the game. That doesn't even account for attempting to get my friends to make that trip from even further away than I am. Unless said game is HUGE (i.e. Bowl, playoff or championship games), that trip isn't happening without months (instead of the weeks this gives at best) to coordinate.

Intriguing concept theoritically, especially from a purely competitive basis. But not sure it works practically.

I think that there are ways that the university could alleviate travel difficulties for late away games. If this were to ever happen, I'm sure that you could plug into those efforts.

Also, re: home game unknown opponents: You still have 4 or 5 games where you know the opponent. For people traveling from farther away, and requiring more planning, these would probably be the most attractive. And, as long as Michigan is in the top half of the division (a generally safe bet), you can be assured that the unknown opponent home game is against a top team from the west.

Given a chief complaint is uneven schedules due to the divisional split,and the ensuing debate of best teams vs. conference champion, I propose the following:

The league's top 6 programs - those most likely to be the best teams and in the national conversation - must play each other each year. Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa from the WEST; Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State from the EAST. Since the rest of the league are near gimmes, this makes comparing resumes easy and title game appearances duly earned.

Sure, there may be years in which middling programs like MSU or Minnesota or Northwestern take advantage of an easier schedule, but it's unlikely. They would still likely have to finish with 1 or 2 losses to make the title game, and even then, they would have the opportunity to prove themselves on a neutral field against a strong team from the opposite division. If it's not crystal clear at that point if they are a true top team, then no one will give them credence anyways.

Now, you might argue that this saddles big ten with more potential losses, reducing its chances in the national conversation. But the worst case scenario from that round-robin is three 2 loss teams. That's not debilitating.

Finally each scheduling cycle (every 4 or 6 years, whatever it is), it can be determined if one of those top 6 should be replaced.

Although, I'd make a change...I would change the "best teams in the other division" list every 5 years or so. Some teams cycle up and down a bit. For example,

Wisconsin was a tire fire before Alvarez arrived

Illinois could get consistently good with Lovie Smith as the coach (or just a consistently good coach other than the Zooker...)

What happens to Iowa after Ferentz retires?

Northwestern has been good before. (At least for a few seasons).

Nebraska hasn't been the same since Osborne retired.

While things are probably more stable in the East with Michigan, OSU, and PSU, that could change if PSU has just been really lucky this year and Franklin isn't a great coach.

I like my plan better because it gets the best teams to play each other every year. Although the whole "no divisions" thing is probably the next best thing. And then the CG is just between the two best teams (whether they have played each other or not).

Now that it's legal, just get rid of divisions, and have the two best teams play. Leave the league schedule at 9 games. After 2019 the schedule isn't made yet so you can make more changes then. 3 Rivalry games that you play every year, some may be made up, but playing every year they can grow over time. We could play Ohio State, Sttae, and maybe Minnesota every year, Wisconsin could play Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska, then in the other 6 games you get to go to every B1G stadium over a 4 year career. Of course not everyones rivalry will be equal to ours, but with these diluted conferences of 14 teams it would work best to give a real champion.

You would probably get a fair number of ties (at 8-1 or 7-2) that would need to be broken. Break those ties by "strength of victory" or "record vs common opponents" or such.

FWIW, if we got rid of the divisions, our new B1G title games. These games assume the schedules remain the same (which probably would not be the case if we actually did ditch the divisions):

2016 --- Penn State (8-1) vs Ohio State (8-1). This is different vs real life.

2015 --- Iowa (8-0) vs Michigan State (7-1). MSU gets the spot with the head-to-head win over OSU (7-1). Same as real life.

2014 --- Ohio State (8-0) vs Wisconsin (7-1). Wisky over MSU (7-1) given Wisky had the better B1G opponents (in aggregate) and had the 2 best wins ; MSU and Wisky had no head-to-head and equal records among common opponents. Same as real life.

2013 --- Ohio State (8-0) vs Michigan State (8-0). Nice & clean, same as in real life.

2012 --- Nebraska (7-1) vs. Michigan (6-2). This match-up is different vs. real life. People forget, but Wisconsin made the title game with a 4-4 (!!!!!) record. They were not good and finished 3rd in the Legends but took advantage of sanctions that were in effect for both OSU and PSU.

2011 --- Michigan State (7-1) vs. Michigan (6-2). Michigan over both PSU (6-2) and Wisky (6-2) given U-M's 4-0 record vs. common opponents among the 3 (Wisky & PSU both 3-1). This is different vs. real life.

but you're including the conference title game as part of the "they all played each other" - which will not always be the case among best 3/4 teams, and will not always be as easy as you say it is this year. you are not proposing a system, just saying that this year, there could be a way to break all the ties and result in PSU as the top team.

What is wrong with including the title game? The design of the title game is to determine a champion and in this case it did. If Wisco had won it would be a shame but by record PSU and OSU were the best two teams and PSU won the head to head match up.

Thank you and that's exactly the point. Michigan fanbase is livid because we are left out. But the year Michigan benefits from the extant system, there would be no tears for someone else who would be left out in that year.

People need to open their eyes. Penn State has been opening a can on people just like Michigan did early on. If the Michigan/OSU game goes the other way (1 play game we got jipped out of), who is the second best team in the division? Penn State who has 1 B1G loss and a H2H win over Ohio State? Or OSU with 2? I'd be inclined to say Penn State.

Michigan loses that Ohio State game and now Penn State doesn't deserve their B1G Championship, and are the third best team in the division by some distance.

Penn State deserves to have won the B1G Championship. Ohio State deserves to be in the playoffs. All is right with the world.

I agree. Here we are 2 and half months after our game against them and PSU beat all of our common opponents by equal or better margins with the exceptions of Rutgers (I mean MSU shut them out for crying out loud, so who cares) and Maryland (They played Maryland on the road in that hurricane weather).

No, Penn State has not been opening up a can on people. They beat Wisconsin by throwing multiple deep, 50/50 jump balls, and coming down with all of them. This was necessary because Wisconsin put them down by 3 TDs early in the second quarter. Given Wisconsin's excellent defense in closer games, Penn State had no choice but to pull the arm on the slot machine several times, needing to win almost all of them.

Similarly, their win over Ohio State was as flukey a play as Mich State's punt block TD for the win last year.

Their body of work since the Michigan game is impressive. Hanging around with Ohio State such that they were in position to win on a freak play was excellent. But c'mon; I can't unsee what I saw two months ago.

Their defense is much improved (held Wisconsin to 17 offensive points total, and only 3 points in the second half). Our offense has fallen off a cliff in the last month. Right now PSU would be competitive against us.

Holding Wisconsin to 17 offensive points is not the sign of a good defense. It's the sign of a terrible defense, which is what PSU has. Keep in mind how bad Wisconsin's offense is.

As for PSU: 49-10. Michigan has not lost by 39+ points since 1935 (40-0, vs. Minnesota). Eighty years! This isn't something that champion-level teams do, no matter how many linebackers were injured.

Anyone who believes that PSU is better than Michigan, more "deserving" than Michigan, or should be ranked higher than Michigan is essentially saying that the first couple of months of the schedule don't matter. We may as well just start the season in November.

If Team A beats Team B by 39 points -- or, hell, even 25 points -- Team A is better. Full stop. I don't care what the circumstances were; I don't care whom else they beat. The margin of error in college football is big, but it's not five+ possessions big.

FEI has PSU's defense at 27th. S&P+ has PSU's defense at 16th. So advanced stats says PSU has a good defense.

The only teams to hold Wisconsin to equal or fewer points in regulation were LSU, Michigan, Iowa, Nebraska. I'd say those are some pretty good defenses to be in company with against a common opponent.

When PSU played us they had literally no middle linebackers and one of the few linebackers they did have got ejected on a targetting call that was pretty soft IMO since it looked like he was making a play on the ball.

Michigan gives up 10 offensive points to Wisconsin = AMAIZING DEFENSE BEST EVARR
Penn State gives up 17 offensive points to Wisconsin = Terrible Defense
Ohio State gave up 23, they must be worse than RUTGERS.

Champion-level teams do win championships though. Something we haven't done since 2004? TWELVE YEARS. Penn State has won three in the that time frame.

September somewhat matters, but you can't win championships in September. November is when it counts. 2-2 in November for Michigan. 5-0 in November/December for PSU. Penn State handled their business. While we didn't. That's more deserving. Full Stop.

You want to base the whole Michigan vs. Penn State argument off of a game played a 2-1/2 months ago. Both teams are different now. Michigan's offense is nowhere near as efficient. PSU is one of the hottest teams in the country. There is such thing as improvement. And it seems Michigan peaked early an plateaued. Maybe we still are the better team (The CFP Commitee disagrees), but we blew our chance to prove it.

Houston wasn't really a backup though. Dude had 40% of Wisconsins passing attempts on the season and had better completion % and YPA by a good deal. Hornibrook and Houston split time pretty evenly on the year.

And to be fair I don't think PSU is the best team in the conference. That honor goes to OSU. I just think PSU won the conference fair and square so they deserve some credit.

How are they fortunate? How? They didn't get lucky. They won their games. They weren't gifted an imaginary first down. They weren't the benefitiary of terrible reffing. A blocked FG returned for a touchdown is as much as a fluke play as any of our blocked punts. They aren't flukes. Special Teams is 1/6 of the game. They found a weakness and exploited it.

I also want to say, I am not gung-ho about PSU. I actually dislike PSU very much. They don't belong in our conference anymore. And even before the scandal, they were propped up like Notre Dame. A team who took advantage of being an independent to gain a reputation, and hasn't been nationally relevant since the 80s.

What I won't take is the slander being spewed about that PSU is definitively the third best team in the division. In no case is this a topic if we win the B1G, no matter how we got there. The fact of the matter is, in 2016, when the conference is the strongest it's been in at least 10 years, Penn State was able to walk away with the championship. If that doesn't mean something, then why are we playing games? Why would we strive for B1G Championships?

Plain and simply, Penn State was the best team in the conference. They proved it.